After ruining some installations and learning some more, I started questioning the fact that pyenv and some venv management are not taught at the beggining.
elfpie
joined 1 year ago
It's your site too if you stay - even if not technically true. I'd hate to see dissenting voices leaving or afraid to speak up. I understand the moderation argument, but I also know that having your contribution removed will feel like being silenced because that's what happened. There was a reason, but there's always a reason and the blow won't soften unless you agree with the reasoning.
You wanted to get the world out and couldn't. I believe people are listening here, on beehaw in general. You felt you were censored. I can't really deny that, but I'd suggest to still give the place a chance and see if a pattern emerges. Maybe don't visit for a while, it really worked for me getting away for several weeks.
The problem with tipping not being an extra is that one theoretically ends up paying the waiter's salary directly without being in a direct work relation with them. The restaurant pays people to be there, the clients pay the people to provide a service, the restaurant doesn't share their profits with their employees, the clients are pressured to decide how much of that profit should be shared and generate that number on the side.
It's the old two categories being exploited and pitied against each other.
He was, uh, totally asking for it.
I'll admit that I got confused. If you visit the site, the article is a response to the research that says women also hit men. I'd argue they simply chose stories of men beating women, flipped the gender and wanted people to be outraged.
Understanding people's disabilities more precisely is the direction we want to go. Using that to decide some of them (a lot of some of them) are not disabled enough is the problem. The researchers defend their method in the name of uniformity, which tends to squash personal realities.
Basically, they want to exclude people that answer "some difficulty" which equates them to "no difficulty at all". There's a world of difference between " I have no difficulty walking" and "I have some difficulty walking". I imagine the researchers judge the difference by seeing who's left behind and ignoring who is suffering to get to the same place.
I've never played any of the games, but I would understand that Link is a silent character that uses sign language.
Telegram is the same. It's the app people will migrate to because it's the app people learned to use when WhatsApp can't operate for some reason. Not many people there. People here are overly attached.
For the people who suggest users just change apps. Imagine I just ban all your current forms of text communication (you can still have e-mail), but only you, your family and friends will keep their ecosystems. Do you care you won't talk to them anymore? Can you convince them to use a new app? Does it affect your life beyond social interactions? Is it worth making your life harder?
The article didn't go in the direction I expected. Theoretically, open source software can be fixed by experts outside of the main company, but it would be very niche. The expert would need to be familiar with the specific hardware at least, have varying degrees of medical knowledge and have access to the individual in need in some cases.
Forced updates and treating medical software as no more special than a game is the problem when dealing with apps. Tag medicals apps and make it so that system updates have to be manual or go through warnings before being deployed. Offer the option to go back to a version that previously worked. Create regulations to make companies liable for malfunctions.
Daily quests, login rewards, any other mechanic that wants to dictate when I should play, all that ruined my relation with a lot of games. I actively try to ignore them nowadays. If my line of reasoning is I should play a little more because the reward is around the corner and will be gone tomorrow, I'll let the most precious opportunity go to waste to protect my mental health.
Politicians and producers love good ideas that will attract the public's attention, but should be tweaked just enough to not be executed as intended.